People have always placed too much authority in the "Man of the Year", I mean "Person of the Year", oh, "People of the Year" award. But the editors at Time did their job well: They cause controversy and got attention. After all, they're pros.

If this shift was really the most significant thing to happen in 2006, why not give the award to one of the entrepreneurs behind it? After all, all of the big players in this shift were startups, not new ventures by existing big companies. When a politician has a lot of influence, "you the voter" who put him or her in office doesn't get the award. Let's remember that entrepreneurs change the world, and that they made their mark on 2006.